DOCSLIB.ORG

Atlantic & Cromarty Fields Decommissioning Programmes

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Atlantic & Cromarty Fields Decommissioning Programmes Unclassified Atlantic & Cromarty Fields Decommissioning Programmes Stakeholder Engagement Report Atlantic & Cromarty Fields Decommissioning Programmes Stakeholder Engagement Report CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................4 1.1 Purpose .............................................................................................................4 1.2 Regulatory Context ............................................................................................4 1.3 Background to the Decommissioning Proposals ................................................5 1.4 Exploration of Re-use Opportunities ..................................................................7 1.5 Summary of Decommissioning Proposals ..........................................................7 2.0 STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT .................................................................................9 2.1 BG’s Approach ...................................................................................................9 2.2 The Engagement Programme ............................................................................9 2.3 Learning from Others .........................................................................................9 3.0 KEY ENGAGEMENT ACTIVITIES .............................................................................. 11 3.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................... 11 3.2 DECC (now BEIS)............................................................................................ 13 3.3 Regulatory Agencies and Statutory Consultees ............................................... 13 3.4 Early Stage Briefings ....................................................................................... 15 3.5 Stakeholder Workshop ..................................................................................... 18 3.6 Comment on Emerging Recommendations ...................................................... 20 4.0 RESPONDING TO THE CONSULTATION ................................................................. 23 4.1 Commenting on the Draft Decommissioning Programmes ............................... 23 5.0 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................ 24 LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX 1 ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................................... 25 APPENDIX 2 PIPELINE STATUS - NEARSHORE ............................................................... 26 APPENDIX 3 LIST OF STAKEHOLDERS ............................................................................ 27 APPENDIX 4 INTRODUCTORY EMAIL TO STAKEHOLDERS 26 June 2016 ..................... 29 APPENDIX 5 STAKEHOLDER WORKSHOP ....................................................................... 31 LIST OF TABLES Table 1 – Exploration of Re-use Options ................................................................................7 Table 2 – Key Engagement Milestones, Activities and Outcomes ........................................ 11 Table 3 – Preliminary Stakeholder Comments ...................................................................... 16 Table 4 – Queries Arising from the Stakeholder Workshop, November 2015 ....................... 19 Table 5 – Responses to Emerging Recommendations Report Issued to Stakeholders ....................................................................................................... 21 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 - Atlantic & Cromarty Field Location .........................................................................5 Figure 2 – Atlantic & Cromarty Field Layout ...........................................................................6 AC-ACD-W-RE-3016 Page 3 Atlantic & Cromarty Fields Decommissioning Programmes Stakeholder Engagement Report 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose This report describes the engagement which BG Group (BG) has undertaken with stakeholders during the pre-planning for the decommissioning of the subsea facilities and pipelines associated with the Atlantic and Cromarty (A&C) Fields in the outer Moray Firth which ceased production of gas and gas condensate in 2009. It is made available as part of the statutory and public consultation which has been triggered by submission of Draft Decommissioning Programmes to the Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) which assumed the responsibilities for decommissioning from the Department of Energy and Climate Change in July 2016. The Stakeholder Engagement Report is one of three documents submitted for consultation in support of the Draft Decommissioning Programmes [1] for the A&C Field, alongside the Comparative Assessment Report [2] and the Environmental Impact Assessment Report [3]. Each of these documents is available online at the BEIS website1, on request from BG (see section 4), and, during the consultation, available at its offices2. Other documents cited within each of the documents can also be made available to consultees for inspection by prior arrangement with BG (see Section 4). The consultation runs from 20 September to 20 October 2016 and details of how to respond are advised in Section 4 of this document. Responses from statutory, regulatory and public consultees will be incorporated into the ‘final’ Decommissioning Programmes which are submitted for approval, and reported in an updated version of this present document. 1.2 Regulatory Context The decommissioning of offshore oil and gas installations and pipelines on the United Kingdom Continental Shelf (UKCS) is controlled through the Petroleum Act 1998, as amended by the Energy Act 2008. The UK's international obligations on decommissioning are governed principally by the 1992 Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North East Atlantic (OSPAR Convention) [4] which requires the removal of facilities (e.g. platforms and subsea infrastructure) except in very special circumstances. The DECC Guidance Notes [5] align with OSPAR Decision 98/3. The intention for removal of the A&C facilities complies with these requirements. Pipelines do not fall within the remit of OSPAR Decision 98/3 but BEIS requires that operators apply the OSPAR framework of comparative assessment when assessing all feasible options for those pipelines which are candidates for decommissioning in situ. Because of the widely different circumstances of each case, the Guidance Notes do not predict with any certainty what decommissioning strategy may be approved in respect of any class of pipeline. Each pipeline must therefore be considered on its merits and in the light of comparative assessment of the feasible options taking into account the safety, environmental, technical, societal and cost impacts of the options. 1 See ‘Table of draft decommissioning programmes under consideration’ at www.gov.uk/guidance/oil-and-gas- decommissioning-of-offshore-installations-and-pipelines. 2 BG Group, 27 Albyn Place, Aberdeen AB10 1YL Page 4 AC-ACD-W-RE-3016 Atlantic & Cromarty Fields Decommissioning Programmes Stakeholder Engagement Report 1.3 Background to the Decommissioning Proposals The Atlantic and Cromarty Fields are located in the outer Moray Firth in UK Continental Shelf (UKCS) Blocks 14/26a, 20/1 (north) and 13/30 respectively (see Figure 1). They lie approximately 79 km northeast of the St Fergus gas terminal on the north east Aberdeenshire coast and approximately 135 km from the median line with Norway. Figure 1 shows the location of the fields and their associated subsea infrastructure which tie the fields back to shore. Figure 1 - Atlantic & Cromarty Field Location Gas and gas condensate production from within the fields began in 2005 and ended in 2009, with permission to cease production formally granted by DECC in 2011. The pipelines were cleaned and put into the Interim Pipeline Regime (IPR) pending investigation of options to extend the useful life of the fields. The Atlantic manifold (see Figure 2), the largest item of subsea equipment within the A&C infrastructure, which connects the A&C wells to the export pipeline and to the control umbilicals (operated from the neighbouring Goldeneye platform) was also left in place for this period together with other subsea equipment. The three wells were mechanically plugged in 2014, pending full ‘plug and abandonment during decommissioning execution. AC-ACD-W-RE-3016 Page 5 Atlantic & Cromarty Fields Decommissioning Programmes Stakeholder Engagement Report Figure 2 – Atlantic & Cromarty Field Layout Page 6 AC-ACD-W-RE-3016 Atlantic & Cromarty Fields Decommissioning Programmes Stakeholder Engagement Report 1.4 Exploration of Re-use Opportunities A number of options for re-using the A&C facilities have been explored since production ended, including: Use of the reservoirs for gas storage; Use of the reservoirs for storing carbon dioxide; Sale of the facilities and infrastructure to other oil and gas companies. A summary of the discussions held appears in Table 1 below. Table 1 – Exploration of Re-use Options Date Potential Re-use Opportunity Discussions on potential third party acquisition of the entire Atlantic & Cromarty system 2010-2011 (including fields and associated infrastructure). 2010-2011 Discussions to explore carbon capture and storage and potential tie-in the Phoenix Field. Discussions on potential third party acquisition in the Atlantic and Cromarty fields and/or all or 2012
Load more

Recommended publications
  • To Arrive at the Total Scores, Each Company Is Marked out of 10 Across
    BRITAIN’S MOST ADMIRED COMPANIES THE RESULTS 17th last year as it continues to do well in the growing LNG business, especially in Australia and Brazil. Veteran chief executive Frank Chapman is due to step down in the new year, and in October a row about overstated reserves hit the share price. Some pundits To arrive at the total scores, each company is reckon BG could become a take over target as a result. The biggest climber in the top 10 this year is marked out of 10 across nine criteria, such as quality Petrofac, up to fifth from 68th last year. The oilfield of management, value as a long-term investment, services group may not be as well known as some, but it is doing great business all the same. Its boss, Syrian- financial soundness and capacity to innovate. Here born Ayman Asfari, is one of the growing band of are the top 10 firms by these individual measures wealthy foreign entrepreneurs who choose to make London their operating base and home, to the benefit of both the Exchequer and the employment figures. In fourth place is Rolls-Royce, one of BMAC’s most Financial value as a long-term community and environmental soundness investment responsibility consistent high performers. Hardly a year goes past that it does not feature in the upper reaches of our table, 1= Rightmove 9.00 1 Diageo 8.61 1 Co-operative Bank 8.00 and it has topped its sector – aero and defence engi- 1= Rotork 9.00 2 Berkeley Group 8.40 2 BASF (UK & Ireland) 7.61 neering – for a decade.
    [Show full text]
  • BG Group's LNG Business
    FACT SHEET – LIQUEFIED NATURAL GAS BG Group’s LNG business BG Group’s LNG activities are founded on a deep understanding of our target markets and customers, along with a unique combination of infrastructure, flexible supply, shipping capacity and marketing capabilities. We have a strong presence in all segments of the chain, from upstream exploration and production, through liquefaction, shipping and regasification, to the end market. In liquefaction, we have a track record of execution, having been materially involved in the delivery of six liquefaction trains at projects in Trinidad and Tobago and Egypt. In shipping, we have one of the largest LNG fleets of any international oil and gas company consisting of (as of March 2012) around 25 owned or chartered modern vessels that are able to meet BG Group LNG sales terminal equity and/or capacity BG Group LNG sales terminal short/medium term BG Group LNG long term contracted sources BG Group LNG short term sources the needs of a rapidly changing market. In regasification, we have supply rights or terminal capacity in the UK, the US and Singapore, valuable entry points for agreement for LNG exports from the LNG supply position by around 50% LNG into these markets, as well as long- US, with a purchase of 5.5 mtpa from above current levels over the next three term sales to customers in Chile, Japan the Sabine Pass LNG terminal being years, targeting 20 million tonnes per and China. developed by Cheniere Energy Partners, annum (mtpa) by 2015. In light of our L.P., and are progressing plans for export progress at QCLNG, together with the The Group has developed an industry from the Lake Charles facility, where we growth potential inherent within the leading portfolio of flexible long-term hold 100% of the import capacity.
    [Show full text]
  • Register of Lords' Interests
    REGISTER OF LORDS’ INTERESTS _________________ The following Members of the House of Lords have registered relevant interests under the code of conduct: ABERDARE, LORD Category 10: Non-financial interests (a) Director, F.C.M. Limited (recording rights) Category 10: Non-financial interests (c) Trustee, National Library of Wales Category 10: Non-financial interests (e) Trustee, Stephen Dodgson Trust (promotes continued awareness/performance of works of composer Stephen Dodgson) Chairman and Trustee, Berlioz Sesquicentenary Committee (music) Chairman and Trustee, Berlioz Society Trustee, West Wycombe Charitable Trust ADAMS OF CRAIGIELEA, BARONESS Nil No registrable interests ADDINGTON, LORD Category 1: Directorships Chairman, Microlink PC (UK) Ltd (computing and software) Category 8: Gifts, benefits and hospitality Two tickets and hospitality provided by Football Association to Manchester City v Watford FA Cup Final, Wembley Stadium, 18 May 2019 Guest of Vitality at the Netball World Cup, 12 July 2019; three tickets and hospitality provided * Category 10: Non-financial interests (a) Director and Trustee, The Atlas Foundation (registered charity; seeks to improve lives of disadvantaged people across the world) Category 10: Non-financial interests (d) President (formerly Vice President), British Dyslexia Association Category 10: Non-financial interests (e) Vice President, UK Sports Association Vice President, Lakenham Hewitt Rugby Club ADEBOWALE, LORD Category 1: Directorships Director, Leadership in Mind Ltd (business activities; certain income from services provided personally by the member is or will be paid to this company; see category 4(a)) Director, Visionable Limited (formerly IOCOM UK Ltd) (visual business platform) Independent Non-executive Director, Co-operative Group Board of Directors (consumer co-operative) Non-executive Director, Nuffield Health (healthcare) Category 2: Remunerated employment, office, profession etc.
    [Show full text]
  • The Mineral Industry of Tunisia in 2013
    2013 Minerals Yearbook TUNISIA U.S. Department of the Interior December 2016 U.S. Geological Survey THE MINERAL INDUSTRY OF TUNISIA By Mowafa Taib In 2013, Tunisia supplied phosphate rock, phosphate-based According to the Central Bank of Tunisia, 2,700 jobs were fertilizers, and modest quantities of fuel minerals to countries created in the energy and mining sectors in Tunisia in 2013 located mainly in Asia and Europe. The mineral industry of compared with 5,700 jobs in 2012. Although the percentage of Tunisia was focused on mineral fuel production, phosphate rock jobs added in the energy and mining sector decreased by 53% mining, and the manufacturing of phosphate and phosphate- in 2013 compared with that of 2012, the trend was positive and based fertilizers and chemicals. The list of mineral commodities represented a significant turnaround from the negative trend in produced in Tunisia in 2013 included aluminum fluoride, job creation in the sector during 2010 and 2011 when 1,700 jobs cement, crude oil, gypsum, iron and steel, iron ore, lime, and 1,500 jobs, respectively, were lost. The manufacturing natural gas, phosphate-based fertilizers, phosphate rock, refined industries also provided about 28,300 additional jobs in 2013 petroleum products, salt, and sulfuric acid (table 1). compared with 30,000 additional jobs in 2012 and a loss of In 2013, Tunisia was in its third year of political transition 25,500 jobs in 2011 (Central Bank of Tunisia, 2014, p. 31). following the “Jasmine Revolution,” which started as an Foreign direct investment (FDI) flows from the world into antigovernment protest in December 2010 that spread Tunisia decreased to about $1.1 billion in 2013 after rebounding throughout the country and ended with the fall of the to $1.6 billion in 2012 following a decline of $1.2 billion in Govenment.
    [Show full text]
  • Petroleum CSG Briefing, 24 May 2010 Slide 2 Agenda
    Petroleum Briefing J. Michael Yeager Group and Chief Executive – BHP Billiton Petroleum Monday 24 May 2010 Disclaimer Reliance on Third Party Information The views expressed here contain information that has been derived from publicly available sources that have not been independently verified. No representation or warranty is made as to the accuracy, completeness or reliability of the information. This presentation should not be relied upon as a recommendation or forecast by BHP Billiton. Forward Looking Statements This presentation includes forward-looking statements within the meaning of the U.S. Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 regarding future events and the future financial performance of BHP Billiton. These forward-looking statements are not guarantees or predictions of future performance, and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors, many of which are beyond our control, and which may cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in the statements contained in this presentation. For more detail on those risks, you should refer to the sections of our annual report on Form 20-F for the year ended 30 June 2009 entitled “Risk factors”, “Forward looking statements” and “Operating and financial review and prospects” filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. No Offer of Securities Nothing in this release should be construed as either an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy or sell BHP Billiton securities in any jurisdiction. Non-GAAP Financial Information BHP Billiton results are reported under International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). References to Underlying EBIT and EBITDA exclude any exceptional items.
    [Show full text]
  • Mergers: Commission Clears Acquisition of BG Group by Royal Dutch Shell
    European Commission - Press release Mergers: Commission clears acquisition of BG Group by Royal Dutch Shell Brussels, 2 September 2015 The transaction was cleared as it will not grant Shell market power in oil and gas exploration, LNG liquefaction or LNG wholesale supply. Shell will also not be able to prevent competitors from using its gas infrastructure in the North Sea. The European Commission has approved under the EU Merger Regulation the acquisition of BG Group by Royal Dutch Shell. The Commission concluded that the takeover would not lead to Shell benefiting from market power in a number of markets, namely oil and gas exploration, the liquefaction of gas and the wholesale supply of liquefied natural gas (LNG). Moreover, the Commission found that Shell would be unable to shut out its competitors from access to its liquefaction facilities that supply LNG into the European Economic Area (EEA) or from gas transportation and processing infrastructure in the North Sea. The Commission focussed its investigation on the markets where the activities of Shell and BG Group overlap, namely in the exploration for oil and gas reserves, the supply of natural gas and the liquefaction and supply of LNG. The Commission found that after the transaction the merged entity's market share would remain limited in the exploration for oil and gas reserves, the liquefaction of LNG and the wholesale supply of LNG. Moreover, a number of strong competitors would remain active in these markets after the merger. The Commission concluded that the takeover would not allow Shell to influence prices and that these markets would remain competitive after the transaction.
    [Show full text]
  • Greetings to the AAPG Latin America and Caribbean Community
    The Latin America Region Newsletter AAPG LATIN AMERICA REGION PRESIDENT Victor Ramirez IN THIS ISSUE PG 1 President’s Column Greetings to the AAPG PG 2 Recent News Latin America and PG 4 Leadership Spotlight Caribbean community PG 5 Students and YPs In my final message as Region president for 2013-15, PG 7 Upcoming Events I would like to take the opportunity to thank all my fellow board and leadership team members for all of their commitment and enthusiasm, which have led our Region to reach a level of recognition and growth projection that we barely dreamed of just a few years ago. n the past four years, we have hosted 10 Geoscience ITechnology Workshops in Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Peru and Trinidad and Tobago, as well as a highly successful AAPG International Conference and Exhibition (ICE) in Cartagena, Colombia. These events would not have been possible without the tireless effort of our volunteer leaders. I repeat now what I have mentioned several times throughout my term: Our leadership team has focused a significant portion of time and resources on our Region’s new and future generations of geoscientists, supporting numerous initiatives for students and young professionals. For that reason, we have 26 student chapters in eight countries throughout Latin America and the Caribbean and Young Professionals Chapters in Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Peru, and Trinidad and Tobago. We maintain contact with them and monitor their activities, particularly those that take place within the chapters. AAPG programs and initiatives inspire our young people to overcome challenges like industry downturns and political unrest.
    [Show full text]
  • Euronav NV and the Entities Included in the Consolidation
    2020 Annual report Shareholder letter 01 Quick facts 02 Highlights 2020 04 Special report A sustainable pathway to decarbonisation 08 Directors’ report Vision and Mission 22 Company profile 23 Highlights 2020 24 Corporate Governance Statement 34 The Euronav Group 76 Activity report Products and services 80 In-House Ship Management 82 Fleet of the Euronav group as of 31 December 2020 85 Human resources 90 Sustainability report Letter from the CEO 97 Sustainability Highlights 2020 99 Our approach to sustainability 101 Stakeholder engagement 106 Active engagement with financial institutions on sustainability 107 Environment 108 Social and human capital 116 Corporate governance 122 Initiatives and contributions to society 124 Glossary 128 Shareholders diary Financial calendar 2021 Thursday 6 May 2021 Announcement of first quarter results 2021 Thursday 20 May 2021 Annual General Meeting of Shareholders Thursday 05 August 2021 Announcement of second quarter results 2021 Tuesday 10 August 2021 Half year report 2021 available on website Thursday 04 November 2021 Announcement of third quarter results 2021 Thursday 03 February 2022 Announcement of fourth quarter results 2021 Representation by the persons responsible for the financial statements and for the management report Mr Carl Steen, Chairman of the Supervisory Board, Mr Hugo De Stoop, CEO and Mrs Lieve Logghe, CFO, hereby certify that, to the best of their knowledge, (a) the consolidated financial statements as of and for the year ended 31 December 2020, which have been prepared in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) as adopted by the European Union, give a true and fair view of the assets, liabilities, financial position and results of Euronav NV and the entities included in the consolidation.
    [Show full text]
  • Experience in the Oil and Gas Industry “They Go to Great Lengths to Understand Your Industry, Business and Specific Objectives
    Experience in the Oil and Gas Industry “They go to great lengths to understand your industry, business and specific objectives . so the advice you get it is fit for purpose. It’s not cookie cutter, and as a client that is extremely valuable.” CLIENT QUOTED IN CHAMBERS UK 2014 NATURAL RESOURCES “Sullivan is our firm of choice – they are terrific, time after time. The work is of a very high quality, and they understand our commercial intentions as well as the legal issues.” CLIENT QUOTED IN CHAMBERS USA 2013 “The partners ‘are detail oriented, efficient and they think strategically’. ‘Their legal expertise is absolutely first rate but equally or more valuable is their general industry/business advice and suggestions on how to tackle issues.” LEGAL 500 LATIN AMERICA 2013 Oil and Gas &C has significant and varied experience advising clients in “Oil & Gas Legal Adviser of the Year” Sthe oil and gas sector. Our depth of understanding of the oil INFRASTRUCTURE JOURNAL 2011 and gas industry means our lawyers’ advice is always orientated towards the achievement of our clients’ business objectives. S&C’s standing in the industry is reflected in the number We provide tailored solutions informed by market knowledge. of major companies it has represented, both directly and in Our multi-disciplinary approach ensures that clients benefit consortia, including: from our industry experience in each of our core practice areas. AEC (Alberta Energy) INPEX Corporation American Energy Kerr-McGee Partners, LP Nigeria LNG Limited OUR OIL AND GAS Upstream BG Group plc INDUSTRIES Nippon Oil Pipelines BHP Billiton Petroleum Oleoducto Central S.A.
    [Show full text]
  • Chevron Corporation
    GIBSON DUNN Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP 1050 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20036-5306 Tel 202.955.8500 www.gibsondunn.com Elizabeth Ising Direct: 202.955.8287 Fax: 202.530.9631 [email protected] February 9, 2021 VIA E-MAIL Office of Chief Counsel Division of Corporation Finance Securities and Exchange Commission 100 F Street, NE Washington, DC 20549 Re: Chevron Corporation Stockholder Proposal of The Domestic and Foreign Missionary Society of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America Securities Exchange Act of 1934—Rule 14a-8 Ladies and Gentlemen: In a letter dated January 18, 2021, we requested that the staff of the Division of Corporation Finance concur that our client, Chevron Corporation (the “Company”), could exclude from its proxy statement and form of proxy for its 2021 Annual Meeting of Stockholders a stockholder proposal (the “Proposal”) and statements in support thereof received from The Domestic and Foreign Missionary Society of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America (the “Proponent”). Enclosed as Exhibit A is a signed letter on behalf of the Proponent withdrawing the Proposal. In reliance on this communication, we hereby withdraw the January 18, 2021 no-action request. Brussels • Century City · Dallas • Denver • Dubai • Hong Kong · London • Los Angeles · M unich • New York Orange County - Palo Alto • Paris • San Francisco • Sao Paulo • Singapore • Washington, D.C. GIBSON DUNN Office of Chief Counsel Division of Corporation Finance February 9, 2021 Page 2 Please do not hesitate to call me at (202) 955-8287 or Christopher A. Butner, the Company’s Assistant Secretary and Supervising Counsel, at (925) 842-2796.
    [Show full text]
  • ANNUAL REPORT 2019 Shareholder Letter 01
    2019 report Annual ANNUAL REPORT 2019 Shareholder letter 01 Quick facts 02 Highlights 2019 04 Special report Future capital access for tanker shipping: new set of rules is emerging 8 Directors’ report Vision and Mission 18 Company profi le 19 Highlights 2019 20 Corporate Governance Statement 32 The Euronav Group 61 Activity report Products and services 67 In-house Ship Management 69 Fleet of the Euronav group as of 31 December 2019 72 Human resources 76 Environment, Social and Corporate Governance ESG at Euronav, it’s in the DNA 80 Glossary 92 Key fi gures Consolidated statement of profit or loss 2011 - 2019 (in thousands of USD) 2019 H 2018 G 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 Restated A Revenues 932,377 600,024 513,368 684,265 846,507 473,985 304,622 410,701 394,457 EBITDAB 540,668 231,513 273,451 475,005 612,659 202,767 100,096 120,719 128,368 EBIT 202,966 (39,179) 43,579 247,241 402,453 41,814 (36,862) (56,794) (40,155) Net profit 112,230 (110,070) 1,383 204,049 350,301 (45,797) (89,683) (118,596) (95,986) TCE C YEAR AVERAGE 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 VLCC 35,874 23,005 27,773 41,863 55,055 27,625 18,300 19,200 18,100 Suezmax 37,747 30,481 22,131 26,269 35,790 25,930 22,000 24,100 27,100 Shareholders’ diary 2020 Spot Suezmax 24,119 15,784 18,002 27,498 41,686 23,382 16,600 16,300 15,400 THURSDAY 7 MAY 2020 Announcement of fi rst quarter results 2020 IN USD PER SHARE 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 Number of shares D 216,029,171 191,994,398 158,166,534 158,262,268 155,872,171 116,539,017 50,230,437 50,000,000
    [Show full text]
  • Delivering a World-Class Integration in Oil and Gas
    Delivering a world-class integration in oil and gas Oil & Gas February 2017 Transition CEO Huibert Vigeveno discusses what worked in Royal Dutch Shell’s integration of BG Group, its biggest acquisition in more than a century. On February 15, 2016, Royal Dutch Shell plc and British energy giant BG Group plc became one combined group of companies—the outcome of an M&A deal that had been in the works since before the combination was first announced, on April 8, 2015. The transaction is one of the largest in the energy industry’s history. It’s also the biggest the Shell Group has completed since 1907, when Royal Dutch and Shell Transport and Trading merged to become Royal Dutch Shell. Following the combination with BG, Shell is now the second-largest international energy company in the world by market capitalization and production. Merging two large global groups of companies with different cultures, histories, and strengths presented complex challenges. Yet the process went more quickly than analysts had expected, and the deal is already delivering synergies that exceed initial targets. The $2.5 billion in synergies announced for delivery by 2018 was actually delivered by the end of 2016—ten-and-a-half months after Day One of the combination. The expected synergies were increased by a further $2 billion, to be realized by 2018. In addition to an accelerated and successful delivery, BG employees experienced a fair and transparent process. Many of them felt that they were treated with respect and in accordance with safety and people principles: the integration of the two groups of companies seamlessly combined the head and the heart.
    [Show full text]